Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Cognitive and mental health correlates of short-form video use

psycnet.apa.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 213 posts

Re: Cognitive and mental health correlates of short-form video use

#81

Post by Willish42 »

nverba wrote: post #26

As someone who pays for YouTube, I don't understand why I can't disable shorts fully. They already have my money. What more do they want?

There's some thoughtful comments here already, but I wonder the same thing constantly as a fairly addicted user of YouTube who wants to avoid short form video altogether.

I think Premium users tend to be the most affluent desirable group for ad targeting (similar to iOS users on other platforms) and even though YT Premium lets you avoid ads on YouTube, I suspect one's activity feed/"algorithm" on YouTube factors a lot into Google (and others'?) ad targeting. The same eerily effective feedback loop for getting TikTok and YouTube suggestions works better with short-form video, so even if users aren't seeing ads, YouTube still has an incentive to have people use it. So, there's money to be made in dialing in your "algorithm" from using YT Shorts even if you're a premium user.

I'm sure the other stuff about KPIs for increasing usage of shorts to compete with other media sites is accurate too

Re: Cognitive and mental health correlates of short-form video use

#83

Post by bogwog »

nverba wrote: post #26

As someone who pays for YouTube, I don't understand why I can't disable shorts fully. They already have my money. What more do they want?

Google is a monopolist. They have no real competitive pressure, so they're incentivized to extract as much value from you as possible rather than waste time trying to retain you as a user (cuz where are you gonna go lol). Forcing short form video on you could be seen as either an attempt to get you addicted to the format, or just a way for some product manager to fluff up their metrics for a promotion.

No matter what you decide to do, they're going to profit off of you. The only remaining question is "how much".

Personally, I don't want to make it easy for them. That's why I like to use alternative YouTube frontends that limit data collection and block ads. I sure as shit don't pay for premium. Whatever effect that has on their business is likely negligible, but it at least makes me feel better about the situation.

Re: Cognitive and mental health correlates of short-form video use

#84

Post by al_borland »

npunt wrote: post #66
nverba wrote: post #26

As someone who pays for YouTube, I don't understand why I can't disable shorts fully. They already have my money. What more do they want?

They want you to never unsubscribe, which requires your addiction. Incentive to addict + Ability to addict = outcome

It doesn't require addiction though. It only requires an aversion to watching ads, or the more general aversion to being annoyed.

Re: Cognitive and mental health correlates of short-form video use

#85

Post by nearbuy »

prussia wrote: post #77
nearbuy wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't make more money from showing you shorts once you've paid to remove the ads. The default reason some feature doesn't exist is simply because no one bothered to make it. Maybe they don't think there's a big demand from their users to disable shorts completely.

I would wager some VP at YouTube in charge of shorts has their performance evaluations tied to how many hours of shorts are watched. So that's one incentive. Another is customer retention. Make current paying users addicted to shorts, and maybe they'll be more likely to keep paying.

I think you're basically right, but the comment I replied to was saying they'll somehow get more of that specific user's money. While the shorts may improve retention in aggregate, this particular paying customer doesn't want them.

Re: Cognitive and mental health correlates of short-form video use

#86

Post by squigz »

GloamingNiblets wrote: post #59
SunshineTheCat wrote: post #41

I find it weird that this focuses specifically upon "short form video" as though that's the dangerous or addictive element. It's like saying drinking consistently throughout the day is dangerous without specifying whether we're talking about bourbon or water. That key variable seems to matter more than the format. For example: how do you think a person would feel if they watched 30 minutes straight of "short form vid…

The nature of the content is an important variable to control for in future work, but the primary negative impact appears to be via the devastating effect on human attention. From the paper: "repeated exposure to highly stimulating, fast-paced content may contribute to habituation, in which users become desensitized to slower, more effortful cognitive tasks such as reading, problem solving, or deep learning. This pro…

Is all short form video "highly stimulating" and/or "fast-paced" though? I can see the argument for the format being inherently stimulating/fast-paced, but I think that it still comes down more to the content than the format.

Re: Cognitive and mental health correlates of short-form video use

#87

Post by markeroon »

hodgehog11 wrote: post #70

I think it really is important to stress that these are correlations only. Something I've noticed: those with poor attention spans or generally low engagement with deeper material tend to be attracted to SFV. Likewise, those in a state of depression or have ADHD can easily get into the quick satisfaction coming from SFV. It may exacerbate existing issues, but not necessarily be the cause.

Is it important to stress that though? This feels like a personal responsibility argument while also acknowledging that it disproportionately affects people who don't have a ton of control over their response to it.

Re: Cognitive and mental health correlates of short-form video use

#88

Post by squigz »

moduspol wrote: post #53

I know it's probably offensive but I do suspect SFV use also correlates with lower intelligence. This study suggests it leads to poorer cognition, which is in the same ballpark, but I am curious if in the next five or ten years, we'll find out that this stuff disproportionately targets vulnerable people, even if not explicitly intended.

Why would you think it's not explicitly intended?

Re: Cognitive and mental health correlates of short-form video use

#90

Post by andai »

I wonder about the cognitive and mental health correlates of living in a world that no longer makes any sense.

I remember 10 years ago watching a documentary about the previous ten years explaining how we we had moved into a post meaning world, and how this was being weaponized by various interests.

That time seems positively quaint to me now!

I was reading a book from the 1960s, and it was talking about how the world is too complicated now and moving too fast.

And of course if you read books from the late 19th century they say the exact same thing...

https://xkcd.com/1227/

Post reply on HN